About your Search

20121112
20121120
STATION
MSNBC 8
MSNBCW 8
CNN 1
CNNW 1
KGO (ABC) 1
WJLA 1
WMAR (ABC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 23
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)
. and ronald reagan's son says there just wasn't enough reagan. >> i got to tell you, the republican party may talk about ronald reagan but they haven't really embraced ronald reagan. >> somehow i don't think he hit the nail on the head. but louisiana governor bobby jindal might be onto something. he says the republicans need to stop being the stupid party. wow, the stupid party. there is a war inside the gop and nobody knows how this will end. joining me now, steve kornacki and krystal ball, co-hosts of "the cycle" on msnbc. >> our guys, the upper echelon of the republican party, want to fashion themselves as members of the ruling class. we the country class are not in the ruling class. we're in a problem. >> steve, limbaugh is pointing to a big split in the party. where do you think this is going? is this a fight we're going to see rush and the establishment have? >> yeah. this is the problem for the republican party. that kind of a fight is probably good for rush limbaugh in terms of it gives him something to talk about, gives him status within the conservative movement. and it really allow
should be granted a dozen to 14 years for raising my family. >> you talked about the diversity. >> ronald reagan said, i will not hold your youth and inexperience against you. >> i will pass that onto luke. >> you are talking about the diversity about the democratic caucus in which you lead in the house. it is a new thing at least that there is not a straight, white male majority in this caucus. and i wonder, you know, the republican party, won a larger majority of the white vote which they were bragging about today in terms of what went right for them in this election which they lost. they lost all minority groups by large margins. when you look at your group and you have that momentous change, what do you say to people who look at that change and think i'm not sure i'm happy about the fact that there is a -- in the democratic caucus? >> i haven't met anybody like that yet. >> but let's say i would say everybody is talking about how we can appeal to these people to vote for us and we are saying no, we want to go beyond that. we want them to represent us. so it is not about we need your v
's daughter, understood conservatism or ronald reagan, the alcoholic son that grew up in middle america who actually believed, like i believe, like a lot of conservatives believe that if you want to help everybody, if you want to help the 100%, what you want to do is you want to fight hard for their individual free am do doms and unshackle them from regulations from high taxes, from a centralized state, and that's the best way to move forward. we can have a debate over whether that's right or wrong. the problem is, we didn't have that debate this time because mitt romney's view was such an insulated view of a guy who grew up rich and grew up in this insular world where his father ran car companies and was governor of michigan. >> this is a pivot point for the republican party. i think bobby jindal probably said it best. you have to turn -- you have to marry conservatism and pop y lyh populism. we helped the little guy because that's the america dream. it's not the opposite as far as entitlements and victims. that's a pivot point. and the republicans that get it are going to be part of a new
of the major puzzles and challenges for the republican party now as it was a generation ago. ronald reagan in part with the help of jack kemp, a generation ago, found a way to sell supply side economics as a blue collar alternative. to sell it to the common man. that's what reagan and kemp were all about. the republicans lost the ability to do that. they lost the argument once. they're going to have to figure out how to make that argument again because if they're going to say that unleashing the power of the free market is the route forward for the middle class and the working people of america, they need convincing arguments and convincing people to do it. mitt romney, if you look at it from even the slightest distance, was arguably the worst possible carrier of that message. they need somebody else. they need to southern populism or populism from somewhere, but they also need the proof. they need the evidence. and lacking the evidence last time in the election of a week ago, a week or two ago, people went with the -- what they knew, which was the president's belief in the power of govern
. >> reporter: he resigned in the wake of watergate. ronald reagan's second term -- >> a few months ago, i told the american people i did not trade arms for hostages. my heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and evidence tell me it is not. >> reporter: the iran contra affair. bill clinton -- >> i did not have sexual relations with that woman. >> reporter: impeached after the lewinsky mess. and george w. bush, well, there was the valerie plame spygate scandal, not to mentioning the handling of hurricane katrina. that's trouble for roughly 100% of re-elected presidents since 1972. yes, it's enough to give you second thoughts about that second term. so is there anything the obama team can do to prevent this? now, as bill clinton might say. >> it depends upon what the meaning of the word "is" is. >> reporter: the fact is, if there is going to be a second-term scandal, its seeds were probably sewn in the first term. the watergate break-in, nixon's first term. the actual iran contra deal, reagan's first term. bill clinton's liaison with lewinsky, first term. the actual
reasons, yes, because they expanded the earned income tax credit as ronald reagan did because they thought it was an effective anti-poverty program. >> congressman becerra, let me go to you on this. >> it's deja vu all over again. >> what are republicans doing to attract those certain members of the base? >> i don't think they read the tea leaves from november the 6th and i think they're still harkening to yesteryear. it's a new day in america and they should be catching up. he is the de facto leader of the party, mitt romney is still there, and so his comments remind folks of the 47% comment and it's unfortunate for them because they have to figure out a way to distance themselves from a guy who doesn't get it. >> i have to say he is not the de facto leader of the republican party. i think what this did was hasten romney's departure completely from the scene. romney has -- i mean i talked to republicans now. they talk about how you'll never see him speak at a convention again. people aren't going to be going to his door begging for his endorsement. that's a great question. >> de facto lea
s, of considers under ronald reagan and george w. bush's tax rates in 2003. it's interesting, i found two universal effects of those tax cuts. first, in every instance we cut the rates, the economy worked faster. it did work, mr. president, we got a lot of growth. but the second may be more interesting, is that guess what happened to the share of taxes paid by the rich. they went up, in fact, if you want to get more money, mr. president, out of rich people, cut their tax rate, don't raise them, because history proves it. >> dave: certainly did in the reagan years and another peace in the wall street journal a couple back, clinton rates, raised top tier 39.6 and as the authors of that piece said produced the one period of shared prosperity not because they raised taxes, but certainly lead to growth, right? >> no question. the 1990's was a prosperous era, but i think that sometimes people get a little of that history wrong what happened in the 1990's, president clinton raised taxes in the first year in office and remember, the first two years in office were a catastrophe and in fa
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)